Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Fry

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 23, 1928PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOlabksoN, J.

This is an action brought by plaintiffs against defendants to remove cloud from plaintiffs’ title, O. S., 1143, and restrain a sale under execution.

“Walker, J., in Christman v. Hilliard, 167 N. C., 4, speaking to this statute, says: ‘The beneficial purpose of this statute is to free the land of the cloud resting upon it -and make its title clear and indisputable so that it may enter the channels of commerce and trade unfettered and without the handicap of suspicion.’ ” Plotkin v. Bank, 188 N. C., at p. 715.

*835The record discloses from the agreed facts that:(1) Ben Hicks owned a certain piece of…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Collins v. Davis.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
  2. Christman v. . HilliardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  3. Austin v. . StatenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  4. Eaton v. . DoubSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  5. Moore v. . MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Gault v. . Lake WaccamawSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  2. Glass v. Lynchburg Shoe Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  3. McClure v. . CrowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  4. Ramsey v. . RamseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  5. Southern Dairies, Inc. v. BanksCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API